bioshockfandomcom-20200223-history
Talk:Vox Populi
How can the Vox Populi be underground if Columbia is in the sky?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk • ) 20:07, 2010 September 13. Please sign your posts with ~~~~! :It's just a turn-of-phrase meaning "hidden" or not accepted by the ruling party. It doesn't literally mean they live "underground." If you think the phrase is confusing you can change it to something else. ~'Gardimuer' [[User talk:Gardimuer|{ ʈalk }]] 20:33, September 13, 2010 (UTC) The Vox Populi have new features on them such as Devil masks, Headlights, War Backbacks, Gas Masks. Either this could be their final design or just new AIs. Various versions of the opposing factions??? I was wondering just like the first Bioshock will we have different versions of the Vox Populi and The Founders like the Leadhead Splicers, Nitro Splicers,etc. My guess will be like the recruits will have less armor and weaker weapons and the stronger versions will have heavy armor and stronger guns like the Peppermill, the Barnstormer, the Triple R and the China Broom.AirPatriot1912 (talk) 17:23, January 1, 2013 (UTC) Do they have names? I wonder do the new Vox Populi designs have names (Devil mask Vox, Ski Mask Vox).AmberWing65 (talk) 15:45, February 28, 2013 (UTC) Don't know. But since I believe that workers should be free-spirited, like gazelles, I would make a helmet fashioned after a gazelle for the Beasts. ZanyDragon (talk) 14:35, November 15, 2013 (UTC) Anti-semitic 18:42, April 16, 2013 (UTC) ::::"Arbiter" is also correct, I refer you to this page. It is also equally presumptuous of you to assume the vandalism was the work of a single individual: how are you sure it was just one person? While I do realize that is not the emphasis of your point, I wish to note that you brand my evidence as circumstantial despite not pointing out why. Moreover, why so skeptic? Information on this wiki is added both through observation and through inference. If we have graffiti in Vox territory (and it is Vox territory, it's Finkton) that is identical to that of the Vox, we can infer that it's Vox graffiti. Your logic may work in defending a murder culprit, but not on a wiki. For example, we can infer that Jeremiah Fink copied Songbird's design off of that of a Big Daddy, despite him giving only a vague description of the latter's blueprints. It's on the page, and nobody's challenged that notion. ::::I must also warn you that you both edited the page directly after I tried to conclude this, and are starting an edit war. Please stay on this page, and stay civil. --Willbachbakal (talk) 01:05, April 17, 2013 (UTC) ::::If anything you should stop adding it in until we reach a conclusion. No information is a lot better then falsified information. But until you reach a conclusion, I edited it, again, to be more objective. 06:46, April 17, 2013 (UTC) :::::We had reached a conclusion about five posts ago, after which I changed the article to add the information. I also undid your attempts to reverse my edit when you tried to relaunch the edit war and gave you a warning. This is your second, and I won't be giving a third. Unless you have new arguments to put to the table, this issue is resolved. --Willbachbakal (talk) 11:02, April 17, 2013 (UTC) :::::No, you reached a conclusion with yourself and you fail to see logic and sense and continue adding that misinformation. I'm clearly not the only person who thinks that you are making ridiculous assumptions, generalizing, falsifying information, and much more. And when I try to make your falsified piece of information at least a bit more objective you replace it with your biased version and threaten me. I don't like edit wars, but I like false information on a wiki less, so yeah. 16:45, April 17, 2013 (UTC) ::::::'Arbiter' is not correct; an 'arbiter' is a position, not an act. A fisherman doesn't go fishermaning, he goes fishing; likewise, an arbiter doesn't 'arbiter', he arbitrates. I did point out how your evidence is circumstantial (which reading the message properly would make obvious), you have assumed that simply because the graffiti is in an area with a high number of Vox, it must have been a Vox who committed the act. It's like saying "This store in the Bronx/Brixton' got robbed last night. Must have been a black man." (yes, I am aware that comment is tantamount to racism, that's the point.) ::::::It is not presumptuous to state a single individual commited the act, indeed, it is quite clear, somebody has to hold the spray can after all (common sense, good sir). You preoccupation with declaring that this individual MUST have been a Vox is the issue at hand. Also, as the anon said, this 'conclusion' you say you have reached does not seem to involve anybody save yourself, and seeing as you are the individual who keeps adding the information, I don't think you can be counted upon to be unbiased. Finally, I would ask you not to presume to "warn" me about anything; as you correctly pointed out on your edit summary, I haven't made an edit for three years (I fail to see why this is particularly relevant to the issue at hand), but that does not mean you can accuse me of starting an edit war for removing a line of inflammatory opinion, once. Indeed, your continued attempts to re-add the text is what would constitute a edit war. -- 18:15, April 17, 2013 (UTC) I'll put this for all to see: users Jasca Ducato and are the same person, as he explains himself in Gardimuer's talk page. While this seriously undermines your position, it is your argumentation that fails you: you accuse me of bias and threatening behavior; bias would imply that I have a vested interest in adding that edit, and if you are to interpret my warnings against edit warring as threats, then you are seriously deluded. The analogy you put forth is flawed: a real-life neighborhood generally has a reasonably diverse and mixed community, even in regions such as the Bronx whose demographics are skewed compared to the norm. Shantytown, on the other hand, is a fictional factory town populated solely by the outcasts of Columbia's society, who also constitute the Vox Populi. Moreover, the light you're casting this in suggests you're conflating accusing the Vox Populi of antisemitism with actual racism, or at least some sort of prejudice. It is you who may want to reevaluate their impartiality. I've already said most of what I wanted to say on your talk page already, so I'll conclude here. Oh, and by the way, "arbiter" is correct, see for yourself.--Willbachbakal (talk) 12:17, April 18, 2013 (UTC) :Actually, 82.15.141.179 is my home IP (I mistakenly thought 178.77.6.142 was but have since corrected this error.) But that's not the IP you originally started this discussion with; that IP is 178.77.29.218 (different numbers mean different IPs). I will be honest, your attitude and actions here have seriously undermined my opinion of this wiki's administrators (a view I will now be sharing with the administrators on both SWF and the Assassin's Creed wiki), and you have done little to attempt to reach any sort of agreement with either myself, or the original commenter. :In my time on wikia, I have contributed to at least four wikis, garnering a total of over 22,000 edits (and this discount a likely equal number on Wikipedia). I have effectively ensured the continued existence of two wikia wikis by developing their sourcing and images policy (among others), a vast number of templates that ensure these wikis can actually function, and have, on both, also precipitated the creation of their administrative circles. Regardless of whether they like me or not, there is nobody in wikia who, having dealt with me, would doubt the fact that my only aim is to improve the wikis I work on (though sometimes this falls at odds with others opinions). The fact that you would think a user such as I would resort to sockpuppetry is, frankly, insulting. it also shows how very little scope beyond your objective opinions you care to explore. (You will also note that once I spotted the fact I had not signed in after the comment, I deliberately signed in to credit myself. Good work, Sherlock.) :You are attempting to use your position as admin to force and/or coerce myself and the original commenter into accepting your "fact" (you banned an IP after it made one edit in the mainspace!) and, if you had taken the time to do some research, you would know I am not the sort of user to take such actions likely. I am not scared of being banned from this wiki, nor am I scared of a user who has proven himself to be a bully against anons to ensure his opinion remains in this wikias articles. (A poor bully, at that.) -- 12:46, April 18, 2013 (UTC) :The most edits you have are on the Assassin's Creed wiki, amounting to 6, 279 edits. Impressive, certainly, but hardly the 22K you present yourself with. Your credentials also have little to do with the discussion at hand. There is also very much doubt regarding your interest in this argument, as the considerable amount of vitriol you're pouring into it suggests that you're taking it (very) personally. I'll elaborate more on your talk page, but the discussion here is over. I would also like to point out that, as someone who claims to be practically the messiah of Wikia (Oh, the irony...), inventing a vast number of templates to ensure it runs properly, your signature is messed up. --Willbachbakal (talk) 14:38, April 18, 2013 (UTC) This is ridiculous, you can't claim the Vox are antisemitic because one store is vandalised. The Vox use red paint, that's their one symbol. Also, this: "how are you sure it was just one person?" How the hell can you say that any of the Vox are antisemitic based on a bit of vandalism, with no connection to the Vox? The wiki is for facts, not inferences, and there is nothing that directly links this to the Vox besides it being in a tough neighbourhood. Just give up Will, your claims are unfounded and you're starting to sound like a snarky teenager. Thegreatvortigaunt (talk) 16:29, April 18, 2013 (UTC) Okay, so you didn't read the above properly (which I don't blame you for, by this point it's the size of a small novel). While red is certainly the prime Vox symbol (among several others, see the page), vandalism is also their most common practice, particularly graffiti, which is only seen in one other occasion (and it's likely the shop in Shantytown was recycled from there, hence the discrepancy in paint color). Red is not their only color either. Several scrawls in Shantytown either pertaining to the Vox or opposing the Founders are in black (see the archway right before the shop for an example). Like I said, while the developers didn't place a sign right in front of it saying "the Vox did this" it's pretty visible it's their doing. Also, Shantytown isn't just a "tough neighborhood", it's the only known tough neighborhood in Columbia. As the Vox versus Founders conflict is also one of the oppressed versus the privileged, it's pretty certain either the Vox or a Vox did it. --Willbachbakal (talk) 17:45, April 18, 2013 (UTC) I did read the whole lot, and I can't understand how you're so certain about this, I just can't. Are you REALLY trying to claim that any and all graffiti are representative of the Vox? Are you serious? It's a deprived neighbourhood, and you're saying that all graffiti is automatically linked to the Vox? There is no, I repeat, NO proof that this is from the Vox, you're making wild assumptions, along the lines of "the Vox graffiti, that means all graffiti is Vox!". No-one else agrees with you so far, just give up. The wiki is for facts, and there is nothing to directly and explicitly link it to the Vox, or suggest that the Vox are anti-semitic. Thegreatvortigaunt (talk) 19:48, April 18, 2013 (UTC) Not all graffiti, just all the graffiti in the middle of Vox territory, just as it can be said that the similarly vandalized machine near the Order of the Raven was defaced by Founders. Again, Shantytown isn't just "a deprived neighborhood", it's the Vox headquarters. This is a wiki for facts, and I have presented sufficient evidence for this to be evaluated as such, more so than for most of the information here. Regarding the current difference in consensus, I'd like to point out that the above posters (save for Evans0305) are the same user. Why you decided to join the argument is beyond me, but you are more than welcome to do so. Currently, I've been completely on the defensive at this point, and so now that I've made my case (several times) I'd like you to have a look at the evidence I'm putting forth and evaluate it dispassionately. --Willbachbakal (talk) 20:11, April 18, 2013 (UTC) I have read you say the same thing so many times, why do you keep insisting that I haven't? There is NO PROOF, how hard is that to understand? Shantytown is full of desperate and angry people, there is no reason that some random local didn't do it. And if Shantytown is Vox HQ, they wouldn't be spraying evidence of their presence on random machines, would they? You're making a foolish assumption that absolutely everyone in Columbia must be Founder or Vox, and that many citizens are just neutral. You can't know who sprayed any graffiti without evidence of them doing it, there is no evidence of that here, especially when the Vox aren't seen to be anti-semitic elsewhere. And could you explain in detail what makes this graffiti anti-semitic? I can't find a full explanation in any of your copy-pasted arguments. "Why you decided to join the argument is beyond me", are you so sure of this random little presumption that you're assuming that you must be right when multiple people have said otherwise? You've ignored everything everyone is saying. What the other guy said, "No information is a lot better then falsified information." He's entirely right, you can't just keep the page as it is when there are multiple users opposing the edit, and you've made way too many presumptions to state this as absolute fact. Thegreatvortigaunt (talk) 20:57, April 18, 2013 (UTC) When are you going to give it up Will? Clearly, no one agrees with your opinion that you so insist putting on the page. Three people (four if you count Evans) disagreeing with you, and no one but yourself disagreeing with us. As most see, you have failed to bring any convincing arguments to your assumption. I think it's time for an edit, don't you? Stop being so arrogant and admit you lost. -- 06:12, April 26, 2013 (UTC) Let me spell this out clearly: the Vox aren't shown to be anti-semitic. One: they represent the underclasses, it would be senseless to rule out a portion of this underclass. Two: we can't be sure it's Vox graffiti, sure it's similar, but that's like saying Columbia enforced strict library laws because a lot of the bookcases in the game are the same. It's still a video game, there's a good chance Irrational used generic, meaningless graffiti merely to add to the environment. Three: nothing here is anti-semitic. This a broken vending machine for Gear, not a Jewish store. The graffiti is just meaningless babble. There is nothing here that even suggests that anti-semitism is present amongsth the Vox. Four: Despite your claims, it's pretty clear that Columbia isn't so black-and-white. Not all of the upper class fights with the Founders, and just because the graffiti is in a deprived neighbourhood, we can't assume that's it's Vox. Your comment is SPECULATION, and very weakly based speculation at that. It is NOT fact in any shape or form. Why you are so dedicated to defending and maintaining an incorrect statement is beyond me. Thegreatvortigaunt (talk) 22:51, May 13, 2013 (UTC) 1) First of all, what is and what ought to be are two different things. Secondly, Jews were universally hated even by the underclasses, see the pogroms in the USSR as an example. Moreover, it could be argued to make more sense for Jews to be persecuted by the Vox, as even (and especially then) they were stereotypically believed to be sucking the wealth from society, including the poor. 2) I've repeated myself several times on this point: the graffiti is within Shantytown, essentially the Vox ghetto, among numerous other Vox graffiti which I already elaborated upon above. Irrational may have used the model simply as filler, but that is speculation on your part. 3) Clearly, you haven't read the graffiti: one of them has "YID" scrawled across one of the shop's walls, an insult specifically targeted towards Jews. Moreover, the shop's broken automaton is a rather obvious caricature of a Jewish man. 4) Again, you are making a lot of assumptions contrary to what's shown in the game: save for the few "progressives" at the start of the game, it's a stark divide between the privileged and racist Founders and the underdog Vox Populi. I am not the only one of this opinion: see the reviews presented by Yahtzee and Tom Francis. In any case, the point is irrelevant: Shantytown, as I've explained several times, is the Vox Populi's main and only headquarters; it's not just "a deprived district", it's the deprived district. The game itself goes to great lengths to show how badly the people there have it, and show how it progresses to a class uprising, through both scripted events and background detail. This piece of graffiti is just one of the many clues in the level that show what goes on in Shantytown. Not only is this not speculation, your argument for removing it is a case of special pleading where you yourself make several speculative assumptions. And why do I want to keep this statement? Because it's correct. I've spent the last four years editing and monitoring the edit flow on this wiki to try and help document all there is to know about the BioShock games. Correct information stays, invalid information gets deleted. When I am wrong, I rectify my mistakes. When I'm unsure, I defer to those with better knowledge of the facts. As anybody who knows me can testify, I'm not one to take kindly to speculation or to value my ego over the quality of the wiki. As a matter of fact, I question your own motivations: Are you really doing this to improve the wiki's quality? Are you supporting a friend? Or are you simply misconstruing this as a political debate? --Willbachbakal (talk) 01:49, May 14, 2013 (UTC) Let me get this straight: that is NOT a Jewish store, it's a vending machine. And you keep repeating that comment about Shantytown being Vox HQ, but the fact is Shantytown is a big place with a lot of shady people, and unless we can see the graffiti put up by the Vox, or present during the Vox uprising, there is nothing that blocks the idea that some bloke threw it up on a bender one night. If that's even a possibility, then your comment is not fact and should be removed, the link to Vox isn't strong enough to state this as absolute fact. I will admit, the meaning of the graffiti did go over my head. But since it has been scribbled on a racist caricature of Jewish man as part of a Founder vending machine, this could easily be misguided racism from a SINGLE individual, it's absurd to automatically assume this one unseen individual could represent all of the Vox. And like you said: "This piece of graffiti is just one of the many clues in the level that show what goes on in Shantytown." Not the Vox, Shantytown. Not an organised political movement, a huge settlement with huge variations in character and race. The graffiti is only in Shantytown, and even then it could just be one person. You have repeated the same arguments again and again on this page under the flimsy assumption that we're not reading your 'perfect and flawless reasoning', when you're just wrong. And despite your denial, this is clearly an ego trip. You've maintained this one small, incorrect statement for over a month now, even when multiple people have taken it down. It's an edit war that you can get away with, you're pulling the admin card to keep a heavily contested statement on the page, when a comment made by a normal user would be gone without question. Those reviews you posted are irrelevant to the discussion, this isn't a bloody highschool essay. And questioning my motives to "supporting a friend" kinda shows the denial. I'm trying to remove a comment that is too speculative to keep to improve the wiki, and ensure that people don't think the Vox are anti-semitic when there isn't enough evidence for it. No-one agrees with you Will, the comment is only still here because you're an admin, and I know full well you'll bring down the ban-hammer if I try to remove it. Thegreatvortigaunt (talk) 10:34, May 14, 2013 (UTC) You visibly have no idea what the store in question even looks like. I suggest you run through the level again and take a look, or at least see the video I posted above. Point being, the store is an actual shop with a vending machine attached to it, with antisemitic graffiti scrawled all over both. Again, you make a lot of assumptions that would make sense in the real world (or a murder case) but which make little sense in a fictional world, particularly one as markedly contrasted as Columbia. It's entirely possible that, out of all the graffiti lamenting the social and economic conditions of Shantytown, someone simply decided to simultaneously deface the store and not associate themselves with the Vox despite their crushing poverty, but relative to the rest of the game (or even just that portion of the level) that would be irrational. You accuse me of repeating my arguments, yet how can I do otherwise when you ignore them every single time? You yourself are guilty of repeating yourself, and more often than not flatly deny my answers. You can't even bring yourself to look at the reviews I showed you (which are, by the way, relevant to this debate; I'm trying to convince you that Columbia is a fictional and very simplified depiction of actual early 20th Century society), and accuse me of paranoia when you were the first to question my motives. And yes, if you remove that edit again from the mainspace I will ban you. Not because I think I'm right and you're wrong, but because you're reviving an edit war. Notice that I only banned those who did so, and then with one exception for a short time. Furthermore, I'm not protecting the page, even though that would close the discussion for good. I'm not trying to "play the admin card", I'm just not convinced. Please excuse me if my opinion is not part of the consensus (which, by the way, does not equal truth), but as a person tasked with moderating the quality level on the wiki I'd rather not dictate the standards of the articles based on how much pressure I receive. Even you implicitly know I'm still capable of being convinced, otherwise you wouldn't be extending this argument. --Willbachbakal (talk) 11:09, May 14, 2013 (UTC) |width = 100% }} Another Illogical Prefabricated FailureBound Utopia ?? The part I find illogical is when Columbia has a Police State apparatus which makes old East Germany seem pastoral and is so small an ecosystem, why Vox Populi can be anything more that a very quiet secret dissadent group. The Founders would simply (literally?) toss troublemakers overboard and bring in new applicants more to their purposes. Convict labor originally?? It should then be closer to a gulag/concentration camp then (barbed wire enclosures, armed guards at all times, prison garb to make them obvious, chain ganging for some) in the means of controlling such a 'slave worker' population. Letting them wander the streets without a leash of heavy discipline and security seems too lax and asking for uprising. There is no countryside to hide in or ability to 'leave town' and troublemakers would be found quickly thru informers (Luteces couldnt bring Truth Serum from the future??) All these wonderous new things but no labor saving devices ?? Why would any of the 'underclass' stay (especially in the early days when things might have been looser securitywise and they saw what the place was turning into) and even then people smuggling themselves out could greatly erode that population... Wouldnt the Founders want to build a 'city on the hill' populated only with people like themselves who were 'worthy' of living in Columbia ? Why bring in any more problematic people ? All that hightech/whatzits should allow a Paradise requiring no dangerous 'slaves' or unclean 'others'. Shouldnt it have been long enough (almost 20 years) for the Luteces and Fink etc to grab enough 'tear' sourced tech goodies to build that situation? Mind control for menials, robotic servants, culling of undesireables, automation and tesla coils for all?? ---- But then is a shoot-em-up game which needs strife/conflict to have things to shoot at and destruction on a monumental scale for the 'wow' factor. Logic need not apply. Testxyz (talk) 12:33, August 12, 2013 (UTC) First Columbia is not as small as you would think ie sky hooks Gondalas and Blimps are a necessity second given the choice people would choose to live in a utopia this works in the prophets favor if the people are happy there wont be an uprising. --Owen1983 (talk) 18:22, January 14, 2014 (UTC) How large really is it? Lots of grand funtional parts of the city we go thru, but not that many residentials (lots of police/military in evidence though). Whats visible as basis for the existing/living population is little more than whats in a village. And what if more than half the people are un-happy/oppressed/disenfranchised (as we see)? The prophet obviously hasnt shaped things to keep that part of the population 'happy' (he should take a page from his own preachings and the american revolution happening for a similar situation). Using tech to eliminate that dangerous liability to make Columbia 'pure', you would think would be logical to be shown happening. Testxyz (talk) 06:30, January 15, 2014 (UTC) Needs clarifying " The Vox Populi draws its main recruitment from the segregated communities. These draw from Irish, Asian, Blacks, all the way to Native Americans. Another main recruitment source is any working class community, neighborhood or market shops. Though there are rich pure whites who support these groups with aid or weapons. An example is when Booker DeWitt fights through Comstock Rooftops, he encounters a richer couple who are active in hiding and giving aid to Blacks compared to others in their community wooed rather spit on a minority than help. " shouldnt say main twice just draws from segregated (list) and or non-white/foreign born, and then from working class (probably using word downtrodden) Pure whites is also a wrong term (irish generally are 'pure white' ) anglo-saxon might be a better term cant say WASP because the religion of the 'ruling elite' is anything but Christian/Protestant Testxyz 12:29, August 17, 2013 (UTC) What other groups make up the Vox Populi? ZanyDragon (talk) 16:53, September 14, 2013 (UTC) Probably more telling who ISNT part of the Vox Populi (who calling themselves 'voice of the people' actually isnt supported by any majority even of the abused underclass who do not care for violent action or the possibility of losing what little they do have.) We dont really hear much about the people in the middle (who are the majority) who arent 'Founders', but may support the order the Founders maintain, and who arent Vox Populi, but still would desire changes to improve more peoples lives. Testxyz (talk) 17:08, September 14, 2013 (UTC) This is incorrect? "Vox fighters tend to imitate the battle cries of American Indians, one of the groups the Founders attempted to eradicate" Where does it say/show/explain in the game that 'the Founders' (of Columbia) 'attempted to eradicate' American Indians ?? There is that propaganda section making indians look like barbarian hordes (where you meet Slate's crazy veterans), but that is a glorification of Comstock. Testxyz (talk) 00:52, September 16, 2013 (UTC) What connection does Atlas have with the Vox? ZanyDragon (talk) 01:24, December 10, 2013 (UTC) Page clean up- Should there be two separate galleries in the image section: one for actual game footage and final designs and another for concept art and models from the early gameplay demos? 16:00, January 5, 2014 (UTC) Does this remind you of Red Vs. Blue?ZanyDragon (talk) 05:23, January 14, 2014 (UTC) "or to possibly kill her in order to prevent the Founders from using her against them, but in the final game, they have no interest in Elizabeth" Probably because the Vox constantly attacking Elizabeth from any and all angles, even Zerg-rushing to 'get her' would have made it too hard for the player to fight normally (ditto for more complicated scripting required for the opponents). What excuse could they give if she was a valid combat target -- for her either basicly being invulnurable, or dying like a fly when the player simply couldnt defend her in many situations (and some players no doubt would let her 'face the music' just to see what happens). Having her fight would not fit the plot. Much simpler to simply make her a non-target no matter how illogical or a deficientcy for the plot it would be. Maybe thats also why they dropped all the fancy Tears she was originally shown doing that actually were much more effect than those generic 'helper' Tears became. 20:17, February 9, 2014 (UTC) Something I honestly do not think the Vox Populi as narrated in the game qualify as "insurgents" - Levine cited the Red Army Faction directly, and what academic designates them as anything save the TERRORISTS these people actually were...? Vox Populi would have to meet Geneva legality stipulations and standards to constitute "insurgents" their own actions of bloodlust and gory mass executions, no quarter policy in general and basic prehistoric barbarity disqualify them from strongly, "juridical" wise... Mass collective executions of surrendering enemy soldiers, who are unarmed patently, passively surrendering, disqualifies them from any "licit" para-military category except either mafia-style brigands, opportunistic felons or tyrannical terrorists. This has nothing to do with ideology but the group's portrayed actions - so I move to officially downgrade the implicit valuation awarded them in "diagnostically" categorizing them as "insurgents" instead of some more realistic term, if we shy away from "terroristic", something more truth-telling than "insurgents" is called for... Insurgents per Geneva codices are 1) if not uniformed, at least subject to military discipline and order, incorporated into a hierarchy of officered leaders fail here 2) abide by international humanitarian customs of law prohibiting pre-civilized acts of massacre etc. fail, 3) if masked, at least be attired in remotely standardized, distinct dress distinguishing them clearly from non-combatant civilians, etc. fail. The Vox style of warfare is crime, "terror" or pre-Homeric endemic warfare, frankly. I do not even bring up whether the Vox are "justified" in their "revolution" inside the game storyline - I am simply pointing out by all international-consensus and sagacious mind created ethical boundaries born from the opponents of amoral nihilistic fist-law among the intellectuals of Geneva protocols, according to all established usage of military jurisprudence and military soldierly sense, this group is not describable as "insurgent" or even as soldiers, but belongs with the Red Army Faction in the category of "TERRORIST" or something similar, anything but "rebels" merely - "rebels" behave as Washington and co. behaved, Vox behavior is either crime, piracy, espionage, terrorism or whatever, but not "civil rebellion/insurrection/insurgency"... Levine giving away the truth in the Red Army Faction reference was a clue to the wise... AND I am not defending the Comstock lunatics in this video game, whose murderousness I well recognize, in thus asserting the Vox are, AT BEST, Hobbesbawm-type "social bandits", who don't deserve to be called legitimate combatants... Actions of state-sponsored tyrannical malfeasance or state-terror should be likewise labeled in the relevant sections here for the demented blood-fiends among the "Founders"... I LOVE IT WHEN THE VOX HEADS EXPLODE THANKS TO MY SNIPER SKILLS O YEAH, and YES WHEN THOSE COWARDS HAD SURRENDERING COLUMBIA SOLDIERS READY TO BE EXECUTED EN MASSE (INCLUDING A FEMALE - CHIVALRY!) IN SHANTY-TOWN, I GAVE THEM WHAT THEY DESERVED, UNHEADINGS GALORE...but that is indeed not relevant to what I am saying... For those untutored in German, the German Wikipedia designates the Red Army Faction (paradigmatic prototype of the Vox Populi) as "EXTREMIST/EXTREME TERRORISTS" - ideology is irrelevant here - I do not support Comstock EITHER - so...